mightandmagicfandomcom-20200222-history
Forum:Add-on article tags
There have been some complaints about the article tags for add-ons. One example is that the arcane archer page, which originally was tagged as (H5), was renamed to "Arcane archer (TotE)". I personally believe we should be more specific when naming articles. In this case, Arcane archer does not appear in H5's original version, merely its expansion pack. Plus, there is the part where the expansion packs are standalone versions, meaning one can't find arcane archer in the original version or its expansion pack, Hammers of Fate (HoF). Furthermore, I think it would be a bit misleading, since there is Alaric (H5) and Alaric (HoF) pages, as one stands for the original and the other for its expansion pack character. As for the categories, the same idea applies: to be more specific. Hence why there are different categories for similar features in the original game and its expansion packs. Energy X ∞ 20:19, August 2, 2016 (UTC) : I don't we should change the current standard. First of all, I think it's easier for new readers to find pages if they're grouped by the main game. People who are playing Heroes III Complete who are looking for info about the faerie dragon, can currently just go to Faerie dragon (H3). If we change it, they'll not only have to remember that the creature was introduced in an expansion, but WHICH expansion it appeared in. Same with the Fortress and Stronghold in H5. So using the old standard makes it easier to find pages and tell them apart. : The Alaric comparison is a red herring, since we NEED to disambiguate in that case. There's no arcane archer in vanilla H5 that can be confused with the one introduced in TotE, like there is with Alarics. We usually disambiguate characters by world, but we go by game if there's more than one character by the same first name on a world, by expansion vs vanilla if there's more than one character with the same name in the same game (like Alaric), and by last name if there's more than one character with the same first name (like the two characters named Bjarni or the three named Halfdan in MM9). There's no reason we can't still do the same for creatures - have a general rule, and disambiguate more exactly when necessary. : In addition, since the standard has been in place for so long, there's a lot of pages that would have to be moved if we changed it. We would have to go over every creature, faction, hero class, those characters disambiguated by game, etc. and see which game they came from. And when we've moved the pages, we must change the links pointing to them - at least the navboxes. That's quite a bit of work, and I don't think the wiki would be any better for it. : Of course, technically it would be more exact to name the arcane archer "TotE", but it would also be more exact to name it "Arcane Archer", since that's the only way it's spelled in-game. We don't always use the most exact term.Narve (talk) 06:27, August 3, 2016 (UTC) ::We can still use redirects to the main page, so "faerie dragon (H3)" would link to "Faerie dragon (AB)". As for the links, they could be changed by the bot, I think. Just needs some time. Energy X ∞ 19:24, August 6, 2016 (UTC) :: I still don't think it's a good idea. It's a lot of work for no tangible benefit, and I believe it will make it harder for new users to navigate. We already have a wiki standard that works fine, and I don't see a reason to change it.Narve (talk) 16:04, August 7, 2016 (UTC) :::I think we should be doing it by game rather than the expansion it was introduced. Consider "Brute (H5)", which was introduced in Hammers of Fate (although I swear it had a different name in HoF to TotE, possibly "Enforcer"); I really don't think we should call it "Brute (HoF)", since it also appeared in Tribes of the East. It would also have strange implications for all the monsters using "H5", etc., since it would then imply they only appear in the base game. I also wouldn't want to start moving creatures that appear in the Heroes III base game to "RoE" or every creature in Heroes II to "TSW". :::If anything, I would suggest potentially reviewing the Alaric situation, possibly changing the first one to "Alaric (Archer)". --[[User:SnorlaxMonster|'Snorlax']][[User talk:SnorlaxMonster|'Monster']] 03:10, August 14, 2016 (UTC) ::::Actually, now that I look, none of the alternate Haven upgrades seem to note their appearance in Hammers of Fate at all on their pages. I'll have to go through them later, when I install Hammers of Fate on my computer again. --[[User:SnorlaxMonster|'Snorlax']][[User talk:SnorlaxMonster|'Monster']] 06:06, August 14, 2016 (UTC) The thing is, the Renegade creatures (info here) aren't precisely the same as their counterparts in Tribes of the East - their names and descriptions are different, they can't be hired, are only available in the campaign, and a few of their stats are different. For example, the Fallen Angel has lifedrain, but can't cast spells like the seraph. I've wondered how we should cover those creatures. Maybe covering them on the Tribes of the East creature page is the best way.Narve (talk) 08:03, August 14, 2016 (UTC) :Yes, that should be good enough. Even by lore they are creatures that joined the Haven. Energy X ∞ 21:56, August 15, 2016 (UTC) So two people want to name expansion creatures by main game ("H5" and "H7"), and one person is voting for expansion names ("TotE" and "TbF"). I've tried to get some new comments on the thread, but it doesn't seem like we're going have anyone else participating. Unless something changes, I'll move the TotE and TbF creatures back to H5 and H7 in a few days.Narve (talk) 16:49, August 28, 2016 (UTC) :I've given it some more thought and I'll let you do as you think it is the best way. If it takes to rename them back to H7, so be it. Energy X ∞ 19:53, August 31, 2016 (UTC) :: This isn't really a question of letting people have their way or not. Wikis tend to work by consensus - you propose a change, and if a majority of people vote in favor of it, then that's the new standard. In this instance, two of the three participants voted against it, so the status quo remains. If SnorlaxMonster had agreed with your suggestion, then I'd help you move the required pages from H7 to TbF. :: And I'm not too happy with the low participation - I'd love it if more people made their voice heard. That's why I tried to reach out to other users. But after being open for a month, only three people have commented.Narve (talk) 19:07, September 1, 2016 (UTC)